Poythress Redeeming Philosophy

A God-Centered Approach to the Big Questions
1. Auflage 2014
ISBN: 978-1-4335-3949-7
Verlag: Crossway
Format: EPUB
Kopierschutz: 0 - No protection

E-Book, Englisch, 304 Seiten

Who am I? Why am I here? Where do I find meaning? Life is full of big questions. The study of philosophy seeks answers to such questions. In his latest book, prolific author Vern Poythress investigates the foundations and limitations of Western philosophy, sketching a distinctly Christian approach to answering basic questions about the nature of humanity, the existence of God, the search for meaning, and the basis for morality. For Christians eager to engage with the timeless philosophical issues that have perplexed men and women for millennia, this is the place to begin.

Vern S. Poythress (PhD, Harvard University; ThD, University of Stellenbosch) is Distinguished Professor of New Testament, Biblical Interpretation, and Systematic Theology at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, where he has taught for four decades. In addition to earning six academic degrees, he is the author of numerous books and articles on biblical interpretation, language, and science.

Autoren/Hrsg.

Poythress, Vern S.

Leseproben

1

The Big Questions about Life

Life has big questions: Who are we as human beings? What is unique about being human? Does our existence have a purpose, and does the world have a purpose? How should we conduct our lives? What are moral standards, and where do they come from? Why does anything exist? What is the nature of the world? How do we know anything? Is there a God? Are there many gods? Is there an afterlife? What is it like?

In the history of the Western world, philosophers have sought to explore some of these big questions about the nature of the world. The word philosophy comes from the Greek word philosophia, which means “love of wisdom.” Philosophers seek wisdom, especially wisdom about the big questions.1

Clusters of Big Questions

Philosophers have considered a whole host of big questions. Over the centuries, philosophy has developed a considerable number of subdisciplines that focus on a smaller set of questions. Three of the main subdivisions are metaphysics, epistemology, and philosophical ethics. (Later, we will briefly consider some other subdivisions as well.)2

Metaphysics studies questions about existence: Why does anything exist? And what is the nature of what exists? Epistemology studies the nature of knowledge: What is knowledge? How do we come to know what we know? When can we be sure that we know something (rather than having a mistaken belief)? Philosophical ethics studies issues of right and wrong: What are moral standards? Are they universal? Where do they come from?

Why worry about such questions? Do they matter? Questions about ethics matter because right and wrong affect the well-being of humankind. Is murder wrong? Is theft wrong? Is lying wrong? If so, why? If not, how do we prevent social relations from disintegrating into continual fights? Are moral standards absolute, or do they vary with culture? And how do we find out what is right and wrong? Ethical questions clearly affect how we conduct our lives, and how our lives harmonize or clash with the lives of others.

What about the other two subdivisions of philosophy, namely, metaphysics and epistemology? Do they matter? Or are these two areas only matters of academic interest, without significant impact on ordinary living? Metaphysics considers questions about what exists. That includes the question of God. Does God exist? If he does, what kind of God is he? Does he hold us morally accountable? Our answers can make a big difference.

Metaphysics and epistemology, as they are traditionally studied, can seem like formidable subjects. If ordinary people begin reading some of the more technical discussions in metaphysics, they may find their interest lagging and even disappearing. The discussions may seem to them distant or irrelevant or hard to understand. But some of the issues are relevant. As we indicated, the question of God makes a big difference. And even answers to more specialized questions can influence our view of the world as a whole. So it is worthwhile to consider how this area affects our view of the world and our view of life.

To illustrate, let us consider one kind of metaphysics that has an influence in our day. In the Western world many people among the intelligentsia think that the world consists in matter and motion and energy. According to this view, more complex things, like rocks and trees, animals and people, are built up from complex arrangements and interactions of matter. But the ultimate nature of the world is material. This view is called materialism. It is one kind of metaphysical position, that is, one view concerning the ultimate nature of things. Philosophers have debated metaphysics for centuries, and materialism in one form or another has been one of the options offered in debate ever since the time of the ancient Greeks.

Does this position make any difference? It does, because when it is held consistently, it tells us about ourselves. It says that each of us is a complex arrangement of atoms in motion. Any personal significance that we want to have, we must invent for ourselves, because the universe as a whole has no purpose. The universe just is. It is matter in motion.

That is a grim picture. And while some people endeavor to follow materialism consistently, others find pure materialism forbidding in its bleakness. With one part of their mind, they may believe that matter and motion are at the foundation of it all, but they endeavor to add extra layers of personal significance on top of the foundational layer. Both the people who follow materialism consistently and the people who add extra layers are thinking metaphysically. Both have beliefs about the ultimate nature of the world. The people who add extra layers are implying that these layers do exist within a total metaphysical picture of the nature of things. But are they right to add the extra layers? Hard-nosed materialists might accuse them of living lives of illusion and refusing to face reality.

People who believe in God have yet another form of metaphysical belief. They are saying that matter and motion are not everything. They believe that God exists, and that God created matter and motion—and extra layers as well. They would say that the materialists are ignoring many dimensions of reality, including God himself. And they would say that when people add layers of their own choosing, they are missing God’s way and God’s meanings by trying to substitute their own notions.

Many other people do not think about metaphysics explicitly. They do not worry about it, but just go about living their lives. Still, they are often influenced, even heavily influenced, by metaphysical views that are “in the air,” that hover around as part of the intellectual atmosphere of the modern world. Many people who have not thought through the philosophy of materialism are influenced by materialism, particularly as it takes shape among people who interpret the theory of evolution as a form of materialistic philosophy.3

Ties through Epistemology

Finally, what about epistemology? Epistemology studies how we come to know things. This subdivision of philosophy might seem to be the least relevant. But it has ties with the other two. People disagree about metaphysics—whether God exists, whether everything can be reduced to matter and motion, whether as persons we survive bodily death. The disagreements lead to asking questions about knowledge, such as, how do we know whether matter is the ultimate nature of the world? And how do we know whether God exists?

Some people worry that maybe we can never know. Some currents within postmodern thought have become radically skeptical. They suggest that we cannot know what is true, but must endeavor to creep along with whatever appears to work best for us.

Moral standards have similar ties with epistemology. Even if absolute moral standards exist, can we know that they exist, and can we know what they are? How do we know?

In fact, then, questions about how we come to know things interact with the questions about metaphysics and ethics. For example, let us suppose that Sue becomes skeptical in her reflections about knowledge. She may decide that she cannot know the answers to basic questions in metaphysics and ethics. She tells herself that she might as well stop longing for what she can never have. So her epistemological position, namely skepticism, has caused her to give up thinking about metaphysics and ethics.

Suppose, on the other hand, that she has robust confidence in human reason, and she thinks that reason is the main source for knowledge. She may believe that rational reflection or Platonic dialogue can give her the metaphysical and ethical answers that she seeks. She may also hope that rational reflection can clarify the nature of moral standards. In taking this view about the central role of reason in epistemology, she has already tacitly assumed that moral standards are basically rational in character. And the metaphysical nature of the world must be rational in character in order to be accessible through her use of reason. Thus her views of epistemology have affected her expectations about morality and metaphysics.

Or suppose that she thinks that repeated experience, sense experience, is the main source of knowledge. Then she will in some ways treat sense experience as if it were the ultimate metaphysical basis for the world—maybe not the world as it actually is, but the world as she perceives it.

Ties through Metaphysics

Conversely, answers to metaphysical questions have an influence on epistemology and ethics. Suppose that Sue has found what she considers to be fundamental answers about the nature of the world. The world includes her, so she has also arrived at some answers about her own nature as a human being. With answers of this kind, she has come a long way toward answering how she as a human being can interact with the world in such a way that she can obtain knowledge.

For example, if Sue believes, as a metaphysical truth, that God exists, she can reason that God made both her and the world around her, and that God has equipped her with an ability to know this world, because he has given her a mind and has created an intrinsic harmony between her and the world. Or suppose that she has reached materialist conclusions about the nature of the world. She will probably believe that she is a product of purposeless Darwinian evolution. Evolution has equipped her with ability to survive, and ability to know is a subcomponent of the more fundamental ability to...